ArticleAcademic pediatrics2021
Bibliometric Analysis of Research Studies Based on Federally Funded Children's Health Surveys.
Article in Academic pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Visualization of the research landscape on the 20 m shuttle run test in the last 15 years: bibliometric analysis with VOSviewer of the most cited studies.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveBibliometric analyses are commonly used to measure the productivity of researchers or institutions but rarely used to assess the scientific contribution of national surveys/datasets. We applied bibliometric methods to quantify the contributions of the National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH) and the National Survey of Children with Special Health Care Needs (NS-CSHCN) to the body of pediatric health-related research. We also examined dissemination to nonresearch audiences by analyzing media coverage of statistics and research produced from the surveys.
methodsWe conducted a search of the Web of Science database to identify peer-reviewed articles related to the NSCH and NS-CSHCN published between 2002 and 2019. We summarized information about citation counts, publishing journals, key research areas, and institutions using the surveys. We used the Lexis Advance database Nexis to assess media coverage.
resultsThe publication set included 716 NSCH/NS-CSHCN journal articles published between 2002 and June 2019. These publications have in turn been cited 22,449 times, including in 1614 review articles. Over 180 journals have published NSCH/NS-CSHCN articles, and the most commonly covered research areas are in pediatrics; public, environmental and occupational health; psychology; and health care sciences and services. Over 500 institutions have used NSCH/NS-CSHCN data to publish journal articles, and over 950 news media articles have cited statistics or research produced by the surveys.
conclusionsNSCH/NS-CSHCN data are widely used by government, academic, and media institutions. Bibliometric methods provide a systematic approach to quantify and describe the contributions to the scientific literature made possible with these data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.